arxiv:math/ v4 [math.ag] 6 Feb 2001

Transcription

1 ariv:math/ v4 [math.ag] 6 Feb 2001 DEFORMATION INVARIANCE OF PLURIGENERA Hajime Tsuji February 5, 2001 Abstract We prove the invariance of plurigenera under smooth projective deformations in full generality. MSC32J25 1 Introduction Let be a smooth projective variety and let K be the canonical bundle of. The canonical ring R(,K ) := m 0 H 0 (,O (mk )) is a basic birational invariant of. For every positive integer m, the m-th plurigenus P m () is defined by P m () := dimh 0 (,O (mk )). Recently Y.-T. Siu ([10]) proved that for every m 1, P m () is invariant under smooth projective deformations, if all the fibers are of general type. This result has been slightly generalized by [2, 7]. In this paper, we shall prove the invariance of plurigenera under smooth projective deformations in full generality. Theorem 1.1 Let π : be a smooth projective family of smooth projective varieties over the unit open disk. Then for every positive integer m, the m-th plurigenus P m ( t )( t := π 1 (t)) is independent of t. In the course of the proof of Theorem 1.1, we also prove the following theorem. 1

2 Theorem 1.2 Let π : be a smooth projective family. Suppose that K 0 is pseudoeffective. Then K t is pseudoeffective for every t. For the proof of Theoem 1.1, the central problem is the existence of singular hemitian metric hon K suchthat thecurvatureθ h is semipositive and h t is an AZD (cf. Definition 2.3) of K t for every t. As soon as we construct such a metric h, by the L 2 -extension theorem ([9]) implies the invariance of the plurigenera. Here the key point is that the L 2 -extension theorem requires the semipositivity of the curvature of the singular hermitian metric, but it does not require any strict positivity of the curvature. In this sense the L 2 -extension theorem is similar to Kollár s vanishing theorem ([3]) in algebraic context. The construction of the metric h above consists of the inductive estimates of singular hermitian metrics using Bergman kernels. This is more straightforward than the inductive comparison of multiplier ideal sheaves as in [10, p. 670, Proposition 5]. In this sense the proof is quantitative and not qualitative. The essential idea of the proof is the dynamical construction of an AZD of the canonical line bundle of a smooth projective variety with pseudoeffective canonical line bundle. This construction works only for pseudoeffective canonical line bundles. This clarifies why the canonical line bundle is special. Again the key ingredient of the proof here is the L 2 -extension theorem of holomorphic sections [9, 6, 8]. Here we use the fact that the operator norm of the interpolation operator is bounded from above by a universal constant in an essentialy way. Hence the proof here is analytic in nature. The author would like to express his hearty thanks to Professor T. Ohsawa for his interest in this work and his encouragement. 2 Preliminaries 2.1 Multiplier ideal sheaves In this subsection L will denote a holomorphic line bundle on a complex manifold M. Definition 2.1 A singular hermitian metric h on L is given by h = e ϕ h 0, where h 0 is a C -hermitian metric on L and ϕ L 1 loc (M) is an arbitrary function on M. We call ϕ a weight function of h. The curvature current Θ h of the singular hermitian line bundle (L,h) is defined by Θ h := Θ h0 + 1 ϕ, 2

3 where is taken in the sense of a current. The L 2 -sheaf L 2 (L,h) of the singular hermitian line bundle (L, h) is defined by L 2 (L,h) := {σ Γ(U,O M (L)) h(σ,σ) L 1 loc(u)}, where U runs over the open subsets of M. In this case there exists an ideal sheaf I(h) such that L 2 (L,h) = O M (L) I(h) holds. We call I(h) the multiplier ideal sheaf of (L,h). If we write h as h = e ϕ h 0, where h 0 is a C hermitian metric on L and ϕ L 1 loc (M) is the weight function, we see that I(h) = L 2 (O M,e ϕ ) holds. For ϕ L 1 loc (M) we define the multiplier ideal sheaf of ϕ by Similarly we define I(ϕ) := L 2 (O M,e ϕ ). I (h) := L (O M,e ϕ ) and call it the L -multiplier ideal sheaf of (L,h). Definition 2.2 L is said to be pseudoeffective, if there exists a singular hermitian metric h on L such that the curvature current Θ h is a closed positive current. Also a singular hermitian line bundle (L, h) is said to be pseudoeffective, if the curvature current Θ h is a closed positive current. 2.2 Analytic Zariski decompositions In this subsection we shall introduce the notion of analytic Zariski decompositions. By using analytic Zariski decompositions, we can handle big line bundles like nef and big line bundles. Definition 2.3 Let M be a compact complex manifold and let L be a holomorphic line bundle on M. A singular hermitian metric h on L is said to be an analytic Zariski decomposition, if the followings hold. 1. Θ h is a closed positive current, 3

4 2. for every m 0, the natural inclusion is an isomorphim. H 0 (M,O M (ml) I(h m )) H 0 (M,O M (ml)) Remark 2.1 If an AZD exists on a line bundle L on a smooth projective variety M, L is pseudoeffective by the condition 1 above. Theorem 2.1 ([11, 12]) Let L be a big line bundle on a smooth projective variety M. Then L has an AZD. As for the existence for general pseudoeffective line bundles, now we have the following theorem. Theorem 2.2 ([1, Theorem 1.5]) Let be a smooth projective variety and let L be a pseudoeffective line bundle on. Then L has an AZD. Proof of Theorem 2.2. Although the proof is in [1], we shall give a proof here, because we shall use it afterward. Let h 0 be a fixed C -hermitian metric on L. Let E bethe set of singular hermitian metric on L defined by E = {h; h : lowersemicontinuous singular hermitian metric on L, Since L is pseudoeffective, E is nonempty. We set h h L = h 0 inf, h E h 0 Θ h is positive, h h 0 1}. where the infimum is taken pointwise. The supremum of a family of plurisubharmonic functions uniformly bounded from above is known to be again plurisubharmonic, if we modify the supremum on a set of measure 0(i.e., if we take the uppersemicontinuous envelope) by the following theorem of P. Lelong. Theorem 2.3 ([5, p.26, Theorem 5]) Let {ϕ t } t T be a family of plurisubharmonic functions on a domain Ω which is uniformly bounded from above on every compact subset of Ω. Then ψ = sup t T ϕ t has a minimum uppersemicontinuous majorant ψ which is plurisubharmonic. We call ψ the uppersemicontinuous envelope of ψ. 4

5 Remark 2.2 In the above theorem the equality ψ = ψ holds outside of a set of measure 0(cf.[5, p.29]). By Theorem 2.3,we see that h L is also a singular hermitian metric on L with Θ h 0. Suppose that there exists a nontrivial section σ Γ(,O (ml)) for some m (otherwise the second condition in Definition 3.1 is empty). We note that 1 σ 2 m givestheweightofasingularhermitianmetriconlwithcurvature2πm 1 (σ), where (σ) is the current of integration along the zero set of σ. By the construction we see that there exists a positive constant c such that h 0 σ 2 m c h L holds. Hence σ H 0 (,O (ml) I (h m L)) holds. Hence in praticular σ H 0 (,O (ml) I(h m L )) holds. This means that h L is an AZD of L. Q.E.D. Remark 2.3 By the above proof we have that for the AZD h L constructed as above H 0 (,O (ml) I (h m L)) H 0 (,O (ml)) holds for every m. Itiseasy toseethat themultiplier ideal sheaves of h m L (m 1) constructedin the proof of Theorem 2.2 are independent of the choice of the C -hermitian metric h 0. We call the AZD constructed as in the proof of Theorem 2.2 a canonical AZD of L. 2.3 L 2 -extension theorem Theorem 2.4 ([9, p.200, Theorem]) Let be a Stein manifold of dimension n, ψ a plurisubharmonic function on and s a holomorphic function on such that ds 0 on every branch of s 1 (0). We put Y := s 1 (0) and Y 0 : {x Y;ds(x) 0}. Let g be a holomorphic (n 1)-form on Y 0 with c n 1 Y 0 e ψ g ḡ <, 5

6 where c k = ( 1) k(k 1) 2 ( 1) k. Then there exists a holomorphic n-form G on such that G(x) = g(x) ds(x) on Y 0 and c n e ψ (1+ s 2 ) 2 G Ḡ 1620πc n 1 3 Dynamical construction of an AZD Y 0 e ψ g ḡ. Let be a smooth projective variety and let K be the canonical line bundle of. Let n denote the dimension of. Let A be a sufficiently ample line bundle on such that for every pseudoeffective singular hermitian line bundle (L,h L ) and O (A+L) I(h L ) O (K +A+L) I(h L ) are globally generated. This is possible by [10, p. 667, Proposition 1]. Let h A be a C hermitian metric on A with strictly positive curvature. Hereafter we shall assume thatk is pseudoeffective. Form 0, let h m bethesingular hermitian metrics on A+mK constructed as follows. Let h 0 be a C -hermitian metric h A on A with strictly positive curvature. Suppose that h m 1 (m 1) has been constructed. Let {σ (m) 0,...,σ (m) N(m) } be an orthonormal basis of H 0 (,O (A+mK ) I(h m 1 )) with respect to the inner product : (σ,σ ) := σ σ h m 1 = σ σ (h m 1 (dv) 1 ) dv, where dv is an arbitrary nowhere degenerate C volume form on. We set m K m := σ (m) i 2, i=0 where σ (m) i 2 denotes σ (m) i σ (m) i. We call K m the Bergman kernel of A+mK with respect to h m 1 (dv) 1 and dv. Clearly it is independent of the choice of the orthonormal basis. And we define the singular hermitian metric h m on A+mK by h m := K 1 m. 6

7 It is clear that K m has semipositive curvature in the sense of currents. We note that for every x K m (x) = sup{ σ 2 (x);σ Γ(,O (A+mK )), h m 1 σ 2 = 1} holds by definition (cf. [4, p.46, Proposition ]). Let dv be a C -volume form on. For a singular hemitian line bundle (F,h F ) on, let A 2 (M,F,h F,dV) denote the Hilbert space of L 2 holomorphic sections of F with respect to h F and dv. We may also assume that for any pseudoeffective singular hemitian line bundle (L,h L ) and the any point x, there exists an interpolation operator I x : A 2 (x,k A L,dV 1 h A h L,δ x ) A 2 (,K A L,dV 1 h A h L,dV) such that the operator norm of I x is bounded from above by a positive constant independent of x and (L,h L ), where δ x denotes the Dirac measure at x. This is certainly possible, if we take A to be sufficiently ample. In fact let x be a point on and let U be a local coordinate neighbourhood of x which is biholomorphic to n. Then by the successive use of Theorem 2.4, we find an interpolation operator I U x : A 2 (x,k A L,dV 1 h A h L,δ x ) A 2 (U,K A L,dV 1 h A h L,dV) such that the operator norm of I U x is bounded from above by a positive constant independent of (L,h L ). Now we note that the curvature of h A h L is bounded from below by by the Kähler form Θ A. Let ρ be a C -function on such that Supp ρ U, 0 ρ 1 and ρ 1 on a neighbourhood of x. Let σ x be an element of A 2 (x,k A L,dV 1 h A h L,δ x ). Then replacing (A,h A ) to besome sufficiently high positive multiplie, by the usual L 2 -estimate, we may assume that we can solve the -equation with so that u = (ρ I U x σ x ) u(x) = 0 h A h L u 2 C (dv 1 h A h L )(σ x,σ x ) holds for a positive constant C independent of (L,h L ) and σ x. Then ρ I U x σ x u H 0 (,O (K +A+L) I(h L )) is an extension of σ x. Since is compact, moving x and U, this implies the assertion. 7

8 Lemma 3.1 Let h be a canonical AZD of K constructed as in the proof of Theorem 2.2. Then the inclusion : holds for every m 0. I(h m ) I(h m ) Proof. We prove this lemma by inducition on m. If m = 0, then both sides are O. Suppose that the inclusion I(h m 1 ) I(h m 1 ) has been settled for some m 1. Then we have that by the property of A as above O (K +(A+(m 1)K )) I(h m 1 ) is a globally generated subsheaf of O (A+mK ) I(h m 1 ) Hence by the definition of I(h m ) we see that holds. In particular I(h m 1 ) I(h m ) I(h m ) I(h m ) holds. By the induction on m, this completes the proof of Lemma 3.1. Q.E.D. By the choice of A and Lemma 3.1, h m is well defined for every m 0. Now we shall make the above lemma quantitative. Lemma 3.2 There exists a positive constant C such that holds for every m 0. h m C m h A h m Proof. First if m = 0, both sides are h 0. Suppose that for some m 1, h m 1 C (m 1) h A h m 1 holds for some positive constant C (m 1). Let dv be a C volume form on. Let C(1) be a positive constant such that h C(1) (dv) 1 8

9 holds on. Let us denote the Bergman kernel of A+mK with respect to a singular hermitianmetrich ona+mk andthevolumeformdv byk(a+ mk,h,dv). In this notation K m is expressed as K(A + mk,h m 1 (dv) 1,dV). Then we have that K(A+mK,h m 1 (dv) 1,dV) C 1 (m 1) K(A+mK,h A h m 1 (dv) 1,dV) C 1 (m 1) C(2) (h A h m 1 (dv) 1 ) 1 C 1 (m 1) C(1) C(2) (h A h m ) 1 hold for some positive constant C(2). The first inequality follow from the formula : K(A+mK,h m 1 (dv) 1,dV)(x) = sup{ σ 2 (x);σ Γ(,O (A+mK )); h m 1 σ 2 = 1} (x ) and the similar formula for K(A+mK,h A h m 1 (dv) 1,dV). The 2-nd inequality follows from the L 2 -extension theorem (Theorem 2.4) applied to the extension from a point to as in Section 3. Hence we may assume that C(2) is independent of m. Now we can take C to be the constant C(1) 1 C(2) 1. This completes the proof of Lemma 3.2. Q.E.D. Lemma 3.3 There exists a positive constant C such that for every m 1, holds. h A K m C m (dv) m Proof. Let p be an arbitrary point. Let (U,z 1,...,z n ) be a local cooordinate around x such that 1. z 1 (p) = = z n (p) = 0, 2. U isbiholomorphictotheopenunitpolydiskinc n withcentero C n by the coordinate, 3. z 1,...,z n are holomorphic on a neighbourhood of the closure of U, 4. there exists a holomorphic frame e of A on the closure of U. 9

10 We set For every m 0, we set Ω := ( 1) n(n 1) 2 dz 1 dz n d z 1 d z n. h A K m C m := sup x U Ω m. We note that for any x K m (x) = sup{ φ 2 (x);φ Γ(,O (A+mK )), holds. Let φ 0 be the element of Γ(,O (A+mK )) such that and K m (x) = φ 0 2 (x) h m 1 φ 0 2 = 1. Then there exists a holomorphic function f on U such that holds. Then U φ 0 U = f (dz 1 dz n ) m e h A φ 0 2 Ω (m 1) = U f 2 h A (e,e)ω holds. On the other hand by the definition of C m 1 we see that h A φ 0 2 Ω (m 1) C m 1 h m 1 φ 0 2 C m 1 U hold. Combining above inequalities we have that f 2 h A (e,e)ω C m 1 U U h m 1 φ 2 = 1} holds. Let 0 < δ << 1 be a sufficiently small number. Let U δ be the inverse image of {(y 1,...,y n ) C n y i < 1 δ} by the coordinate (z 1,...,z n ). Then by the subharmonicity of f 2, there exists a positive constant C δ independent of m such that f(x) 2 C δ C m 1 10

11 holds for every x U δ. Then we have that K m (x) C δ C m 1 e 2 Ω m (x) holds for every x U δ. Hence moving p, by the compactness of we see that there exists a positive constant C such that h A K m C m (dv) m holds on. This completes the proof of Lemma 3.3. Q.E.D. By Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.3 K := the uppersemicontinuous envelope of limsup m m K m is a well defined volume form on which does not vanish outside of a set of measure 0. We set h := 1 K. Then by Lemma 3.2, we see that h C h holds. By the definition of h, it is clear that the curvature Θ h is semipositive in the sense of current. Hence by the construction of h (see the proof of Theorem 2.2), we see that there exists a positive constant C such that the opposite estimate : h C h holds. Hence we have the following theorem. Theorem 3.1 Let h be the above singular hermitian metric on K. Then h is an AZD of K. 4 Proof of Theorem 1.1 Now we shall prove Theorem 1.1. Let π : be a smooth projective family of projective varieties as in Theorem 1.1. We set t := π 1 (t). If for every t, K t is not pseudoeffective, then P m ( t ) = 0 holds for every t and every m 1. Hence in this case there is nothing to prove. 11

12 Now we shall assume that for some t 0, say t 0 = 0, K 0 is pseudoeffective. Shrinking, if necessary, we may assume that there exists an ample line bundle A on such that for any pseudoeffective singular hermitian line bundle (L,h L ) O (A+L) I(h L ) and O (K +A+L) I(h L ) are globaly generated and for every t and for any pseudoeffective singular hermitian line bundle (L t,h Lt ) on t, and O t (A t +L t ) I(h Lt ) O t (K t +A t +L t ) I(h Lt ) are globaly generated. Let h A be a C -hermitian metric on A such that Θ ha is a Kähler form on. We set and h 0 := h A h 0,t := h A t (t ). As in Section 3, inductively we shall define the sequences of singular hemitian metrics {h m } on and {h m,t } on t (t ). In this case is noncompact, but the construction works as in Section 3. However we should note that we do not know the psuedoeffectivity of K or K t (t ) apriori. Hence at this stage h m and h m,t (t ) are not well defined for m 2. But by the L 2 -extension theorem (Theorem 2.4 or [6]) (as in the proof of Lemma 4.1), we have the following lemma. Lemma 4.1 Let t be a point on. Suppose that h m 1,h m 1,t have been defined and I(h m 1,t ) I(h m 1 t ) holds on t. Then every element of H 0 ( t,o t (K t +A t +(m 1)K t ) I(h m 1,t )) extends to an element of H 0 (,O (K +A+(m 1)K ) I(h m 1 )). 12

13 Proof. We note that since Theorem 2.4 is stated for Stein manifold. Hence we cannot apply Theorem 2.4 directly. Let U be a Zariski open Stein subset of such that t U is nonempty and K U is holomorphically trivial. Then for every element σ t of H 0 ( t,o t (K t +A t +(m 1)K t ) I(h m 1,t )), σ t U t extends to an element σ of with the L 2 -condition H 0 (U,O (K +A+(m 1)K ) I(h m 1 )). U h m 1 σ 2 <. But this L 2 -condition implies that σ extends to a section of Q.E.D. H 0 (,O (K +A+(m 1)K ) I(h m 1 )). Since K 0 is pseudoeffective, using Lemma 4.1, we have that h m is well defined for every m 0 and the inclusion I(h m,0 ) I(h m 0 ) holds for every m 0 inductively. Hence for every m 1 we have a proper Zariski closed subset S m in such that for every t S m, h m,t is well defined. In particular K t is pseudoeffective for every t m 1 S m. This implies that K t is pseudoeffective for every t. Then using Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 3.1, by induction on m, we have the following lemma. Lemma 4.2 h m,h m,t (t ) are well defined for every m 0 and t. And I(h m,t ) I(h m t ) holds for every m 0 and t. We define and h := the lowersemicontinuous envelope of liminf m h,t := the lowersemicontinuous envelope of liminf m m h m m h m,t. Although is noncompact, the argument in Section 3 is still valid. In fact since admits a continuous plurisubharmonic exhaustion function, Lemma 3.2 holds in this case, if we restrict the family to a relatively compact subset 13

14 of. Also Lemma 3.3 is valid on every relatively compact subset of, since the proof is local. Hence h, h,t are well defined AZD s on K and K t respectively. Again by the L 2 -extension theorem (Theorem 2.4), as Lemma 3.2, we have the following lemma. Lemma 4.3 For every t, there exists a positive constant C such that holds for every m 0. In particular holds. h m t C m h m,t h t C h,t Here we have used the fact that for every there exists an element of such that σ t = σ t and σ t A 2 ( t,k t K (m 1),h m 1 t ), σ A 2 ( t,k m,h m 1) σ C t σ, where C t is a positive constant depending only on t (if t = 0, we may take C 0 to be π by Theorem 2.4). Here we note that the L 2 -spaces above are determined without specifying volume forms. Now by Lemma 4.3 and Theorem 3.1, we see that h t is an AZD of K t. Then by the L 2 -extension theorem (Theorem 2.4, see also the proof of Lemma 4.1), we see that for every m 1, every element of H 0 ( t,o t (mk t ) I(h m 1 t )) H 0 ( t,o t (mk t )) extends to an element of H 0 (,O (K +(m 1)K ) I(h m 1 )). Hence we see that P m ( t ) is lowersemicontinuous. By the upper semicontinuity theorem for cohomologies, wesee that P m ( t ) is independentof t. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1. Theorem 1.2 has already been proved in the course of the above proof. 14

15 References [1] J.P. D ly-T. Peternell-M. Schneider : Pseudo-effective line bundles on compact Kähler manifolds, math. AG/ (2000). [2] Y. Kawamata, Deformations of canonical singularities, J. of A.M.S. 12 (1999), [3] J. Kollár, Higher direct images of dualizing sheaves. I. Ann. of Math. (2) 123 (1986), no. 1, [4] S. Krantz, Function theory of several complex variables, John Wiley and Sons (1982). [5] P. Lelong, Fonctions Plurisousharmoniques et Formes Differentielles Positives, Gordon and Breach (1968). [6] L. Manivel, Un theoreme de prolongement L 2 de sections holomorphes d un fibre hermitien [An L 2 extension theorem for the holomorphic sections of a Hermitian bundle] Math. Z. 212 (1993), no. 1, [7] N. Nakayama, Invariance of plurigenera, RIMS preprint (1998). [8] T. Ohsawa, On the extension of L 2 holomorphic functions V, effects of generalization, to appear in Nagoya Math. J. [9] T. Ohsawa and K. Takegoshi, L 2 -extension of holomorphic functions, Math. Z. 195 (1987), [10] Y.-T. Siu, Invariance of plurigenera, Invent. Math. 134 (1998), [11] H. Tsuji, Analytic Zariski decomposition, Proc. of Japan Acad. 61(1992) [12] H. Tsuji, Existence and Applications of Analytic Zariski Decompositions, Analysis and Geometry in Several Complex Variables (Komatsu and Kuranishi ed.), Trends in Math , Birkhäuser (1999). Author s address Hajime Tsuji Department of Mathematics Tokyo Institute of Technology Ohokayama, Megro Japan address: tsuji@math.titech.ac.jp 15